| Author |
 Topic  |
|
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
 Posted - 18 Jun 2003 : 6:02:22 PM
|
The subject of this posting is a question I'd like to ask all of you.
I had a talk to Allen Greening the other night, and it seems to me we are all heading off in different directions.
I can see the merit in log books and stopping 'cheaters', but it seems that most of the quick bikes are cheaters in one way or another.
If we take the purist stance we stand to lose a lot of bikes presently running, and we MIGHT get a few of the disenchanted owners of genuine stuff back out of the wood work.
I've ranted about starting cross-period classes, such as a 500cc singles and twins four stroke class, a historic superbike class, 750cc pushrod classes etc. Trouble is we really haven't got any agreement which way we want to go - keep the cheaters or stop them!
We can't keep going the way we have been, the guys with brit bikes over 500cc are continually getting blown off by Rex, so many stay home. It's the same story in a few other classes. I don't blame them for staying away, none of us go there to look pretty.
I don't really know what the answer is, but I notice the car guys don't seem to have the same problem. Some classes have log books to authenticate history, others don't (more modern). So for modern (up to 85) you can build a replica. Pre 72, it has to be genuine!
Recently there has been a distict drop in entries at historic bike meetings. Perhaps the way to go is get the classes right first and cater for what we've got now, and make it so most people get a good ride. The alternative is to bite the bullet and pull everyone into gear! We need to reverse the trend towards falling numbers at meetings.
|
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
Former Member
deleted
63 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2003 : 6:48:28 PM
|
Dont know about the mindset of people if they keep their bikes in the shed because they dont win.
I thought the whole idea of riding classic/post classic whatever is that you enjoy that or those bikes you chose to ride.
Win or lose so what, what are we racing for $1,000.00 1st prize or a contract with HRC I dont think so, no its just riding pleasure.
Keep it the way it is or we will lose more than we gain. |
TA |
 |
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2003 : 9:16:58 PM
|
Trevor,
Why do you think the log books were introduced? The scene is changing whether we like it or not!
Best Regards, |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2003 : 08:04:00 AM
|
Log books were introduced to settle disputes about eligibility.
From what I can see there are two camps in Historics,
- Those who just want to race what they have got.
- Those who want to win with the best machines they can afford.
It could be that the two cam,ps are diametrically opposed.
But perhaps the inclusion of stock / modified sub sections within each class may assist in separating the two camps. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2003 : 4:32:44 PM
|
There are new rules which decree that if a bike has 750 crankcases (on the original) that is what the actual present day capacity must be. Where does that leave 90% of the bikes racing today? There were NO 750 triumphs pre 1963, yet nearly every Triumph in P3 is a 750. I've seen 850 Norton engines in P3 which weren't about until 1973. Nearly every large capacity bike in P3 has a five speed box in it (usually Triumph). These came out in about 1970. There were one or two Albions and Schafleitner boxes in the fifties and later AMC were about, and these cost about $5000. Rex's bikes fell within the old rules, but both the big hondas in P4, and the big Triumphs in P3 look like being in trouble. The Nortons don't escape, the Atlas 750s came out in 1963, so 750 Nortons ( and larger) aren't eligible for P3 under the new rules. 850 Nortons never were eligible for either P3 or P4, they came out in 1973.
The point I'm making is that while we sit back and let it all happen, we are possibly looking at a situation where a large number of bikes aren't eligible any longer, when the new rule comes in.
It's no good just saying - let's crush the cheaters - we stand to make a heck of a lot of bikes ineligible, with the new rules.
I just don't think it's all for the better.
This historic racing is all about money, and who can afford to go quickest, or even keep racing. This latest effort will just cost more, and we'll probably lose a large part of our competitors.
More consultation is needed between MA/MV and the riders. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2003 : 4:44:23 PM
|
| Allan I actually dont quite know what your line of argument is. Secondly which is the rule that describes the issue about 750cc crankcases. I ask because the commissioners mentioned they have spent more time refuting false stories than tuning their own bikes. As a State Historic commissom member I do not recall such a proposal. The system for changes comes through each HMC from MA. Please produce evidence of this idea actually being considered or the source of the rumour so it can be clarified. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2003 : 10:53:27 PM
|
| There was a post put up about this rule by Allen Greening more than twelve months ago. I have no reason to doubt the rule exists. I haven't looked for it on the MA web site myself. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2003 : 10:04:58 AM
|
Alan I am sorry to be the conveyor of this message but rumours based on earlier rumours are simply unacceptable postings.
I get nailed unless I get the facts first and your defence of " I have no reason to doubt the rule exists. I haven't looked for it on the MA web site myself." is totally out of order.
I am concious I am not a moderator on this site but I get the comments sent to me because I am out there looking for information.
In my opinion the credibility of the whole site is being challenged because of some of your actions with rumours.
I have recieved this note from a reliable source, I am happy to reveal to David if required.
"John
This latest waffle posted by Cotterell is starting to go too far.
“There are new rules which decree that if a bike has 750 crankcases (on the original) that is what the actual present day capacity must be. Where does that leave 90% of the bikes racing today? There were NO 750 triumphs ……………………”
You have heard that MA won’t float new ideas on the site, or use it to disseminate information because it has been tainted by a lot of Allan Cotterell’s comments and disinformation.
Its now not my place to go directly to the Greenings so I’ll suggest something for you to consider passing on;
All of Cotterell’s posts to the site should be quarantined until such time as a moderator considers them either valid, accurate or on topic. To be honest if I ran the site I’d ban him.
We are becoming aware of people who are abandoning the site, and unfortunately 2 magazines have now done the same thing.
For someone to command the bandwidth he does they need to have a lot of credibility, unfortunately he’s got none. "
Maybe over time the suggesttion that MA may use the site to canvas ideas and support could be considered again.
|
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
Allan
Site Moderator
National
599 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2003 : 2:08:14 PM
|
| John please go to forum topic of You must be logged in to see this link. and this is a subject we have been on about for the last 3 years so WHAT are riders doing about it?? it could be in on the 1st Jan 2006 don't you think 5 years was enough time for all of us to do something about this new rule? |
Allan Greening |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2003 : 12:16:10 AM
|
| My information is that nothing is discussed for 3 years. Secondly issues for rule changes for 2004 are being discussed now keep watching and asking your club sceretary. It is impossilbe for any rule chganges for 2006 to even be considered now let alone 3 years ago. The system simply does not work that way. Please check with you LCb for the details in writing. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2003 : 03:39:29 AM
|
John, Part of the democratic process is 'freedom of speech'. I don't believe I've abused that right, or any member of this forum.
I'm not concerned whether MA or MV get their noses out of joint about what I write on this forum. Anyone who doesn't like it can put an alternative point of view HERE!
You seem unaware of the niceties of the democratic process for implementing rule changes through club delegates.
Recently I approached Hartwell Club to try to get single event licences at historic events. The club directed me to MV with my request. Why am I a member of that club? What do they do for me?
I take David's and Allen's word that the reference to Rule HRR082 is legitimate. If it is factual it has severe implications for all historic racers.
I suggest you enquire about how submissions should be made to MA/MV, and how the results of their deliberations are to be commented on. Seems to me there isn't too much democracy in the proceedings of our UNION.
I would point out that this web site forum was set up by private individuals. MA/MV seem to have a distinct lack of concern about getting any comment from riders, promoters or manufacturers on proposed rule changes. It'd be nice if they set up a similar facility on their own web sites.
Incidently I don't remember having ever seen an official comment from any MA/MV representative on this forum! THEY ARE CERTAINLY WELCOME!
Best Regards, |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2003 : 1:16:36 PM
|
Alan I dont recall challenging any right to free speech.
I have found that if I stick it up the same people I am trying to get something done with I ususally get shown the back door and even a great idea is ignored. That does not mean I am a door mat but it means I have respect for alternative viewpoints, and sometimes an a compromose can be achieved. I am sure if you keep "sticking it up MA /MV noses " you wont get change or even a look in.
The structure is through the clubs, if you have a problem with Hartwell take it up with them , not mA or Mv. But if you have been sticking it up them they may dont want to listen to you anyway.
I too accept that reference to Rule HRR082 is legitimate, but evidence seems to prove that it was not acceppted and has not been put up for a rule change. So why get peoples backs up with an abandoned concept.
I have studied the method of making submissions since I was confused about it. Anybody can make a submission either through their club or directly to the Historic Management Committee. But any idea needs support which needs to be obtained by the submitters, not the HMC. It could be that you have not got visible support from within your club or others. Just because others dont support your idea is not evidence that we have become anti demcrocy, so I dont accept your opinion that there is no democracy. YOU need to get support for the ideas and not leave it to others. This site may be just the place along with letters and phone calls to other people.
As you know I am a newbie, I am nobody special, I have differences of opinion about some matters. I have had to compromise with some ideas, bide my time with others. By being polite and civil I generally manage to speak with anybody I want and get a hearing, so the opportunity is available to anybody prepared to not stick it up somebodies nose. If I were MA I would not sumbit anything to end up getting abused. But I have asked MA if they would consider having their media person make statements on critical issues. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
David
Site Administrator
Australia
999 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2003 : 1:31:25 PM
|
And I support this.quote:
Originally posted by john
But I have asked MA if they would consider having their media person make statements on critical issues.
It will be good to not only this site, but the rest of Classic, Historic & Post Classic motorcycle racing if we got behind the idea of having a media rep from MA come onboard and guide us through the critical issues to the sport..quote:
Originally posted by john
I too accept that reference to Rule HRR082 is legitimate, but evidence seems to prove that it was not acceppted and has not been put up for a rule change. So why get peoples backs up with an abandoned concept.
When the original posting was made, there was only what was available at the time and was current, if it has changed since then, we are only now finding out about it.
From discussions I have been having, it appears that the HRR082 rule has been ruled out. Please correct me if I am wrong in my assumption.
On one final note, this site was setup by private individuals for all to use, but it should not stop the organisations from also making comments, surely!
|
Regards,
David
Webmaster & Owner of Classic Motorcycling Australia
Quote: I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted to be paid. |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2003 : 6:23:04 PM
|
John and David,
A great deal of what I've said about 'Historic Superbike Races' and the apparent need for 'cross-period races based on capacity classes only', has been prompted by the assumption that Rule HRR 082 was a fait accompli. I understood it was on the books for definite introduction in 2006.
We still don't seem to know whether this is the case or not.
My criticism of MA/MV is that the process of introducing new rules such as this, and the ones about log books and oil pans on historics, is not transparent. I may be wrong in this, as info about rule changes may be sent through club delegates to the clubs. Personally I've never seen this material. I have however seen situations where rules have been changed to the definite benefit of the initiator. (The introduction of 500cc as the capacity limit for junior sidecar certainly suited the Konig two stroke, which was on the water when the rule was changed).
As far as 'getting up MA/MVs noses' is concerned, I couldn't care less. I'd prefer to have them on-side, however I don't think it's going to make much difference if they are not.
The fact that Rule HRR 082 existed even as a draft, and it was not general knowledge amongst historic riders , disturbs me. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
16 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2003 : 10:23:02 PM
|
Given that the topic here is where is historic racing going, my main area of interest is period 3.
I was going through two old programs that I have and I put them into two excel spreadsheets,sorted them and deleted duplicates to come up with the following figures
Darley 1959
125cc - 30 entries
250cc - 30
350cc - 68
500cc - 48
500cc+ - 6
Phillip Island 1961
125cc - 35 entries
250cc - 35
350cc - 108
500cc - 65
500cc+ - 6
I think these entries are fairy representative of the era and it is a pity that the smaller classes are under represented at historic meetings in Victoria at the moment and have been for many years.
I think historic racing could benefit from trying to encourage 350cc and smaller back to the track in period 3
RonG |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2003 : 10:40:49 PM
|
Ron,
I believe a 350 four stroke in P3 (or P2) must be one of the nicest bikes to race. For one thing most of the components are similar to the same make 500cc, and withstand the stresses better than when used in the 500cc version.
Certainly a good way to cut costs. I would expect a 350 Manx to last a few seasons without a major rebuild. And a 350 goldie would be an excellent bike to race. Pity the programs aren't structured the way they were back then, so that there is a good competition available. I believe more guys would race 350s.
Also back then there weren't 350 two strokes in general use. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2003 : 11:11:18 PM
|
Alan I am sorry to say this again but I do not know how many other ways of telling you that you are wrong. I shall list the errors again.
"that Rule HRR 082 was a fait accompli. I understood it was on the books for definite introduction in 2006."THIS IS UTTER RUBBISH YOU LOOK LIKE A FOOL FOR REPEATING SOMETHING THAT JUST IS NOT FACTUAL
yOU ARE THE ONLY ONE WHO WILL NOT ACCEPT THAT THIS IS THE SITUATION
Alan again you have stated "As far as 'getting up MA/MVs noses' is concerned, I couldn't care less." WELL I DO CARE LESS AND UNLESS A BETTER ATTITUDE IS SHOWN TO ALL LEVELS IN THE ADMINISTRATION CHAIN THE CHANCES OF GETTING \ANYTHING IMPROVED WILL BE FURTHER AWAY.
As I see and hear it Allan, the more you stick it up anybodies noes, the less relevant the site will become. So either learn to debate properly with facts or watch the participants drop further away. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
16 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2003 : 9:40:20 PM
|
Alan,
You hit on something that I didn't mention before and that was the cost of running the 350 and under machines.
The late John Keogh's 350 BSA ( he passed away on 11 June 2003) and the 350 BSA that I prepared both ran Chen Shing Barracuda tyres on the bikes. A cost of about $35 per tyre and more than a seasons racing out of a set with good grip.
I also prepared a 125 Bantam and this ran with 275 x 18 Chen Shings at a cost of just over $20 each with good grip and wear. This was in the mid nineties but it does show that some of the costs of racing are lower. Another benefit is that in the 125, 250 and 350 classes, if the bikes are legal, size wise,you are running against bikes of the same capacity as yours and not like the unlimited classes where 650's compete against 750's, 850's and 1300's.
Alan, with those figures quoted in the previous post for the DARLEY and Phillip Island meetings, it is even more interesting to break down the capacities into makes of motorcycles. If I find a spare half an hour I will post them. A final comment. Where did all the 250 and 350 velo's that raced at those meetings go to.
RonG. |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2003 : 10:53:59 PM
|
Ron, I raced a Triumph 500 back in those days. If you raced an over 500 machine you got one ride at most meetings in C grade and one in B grade, if you were lucky. I can remember waiting all day for my one or two rides (senior and unlimited C grade usually ran together). Most of the racing was taken up by machines of less than 500cc.
I can only remember about two Vincents being raced, and the rest of the bikes included a few 650 triumphs. That was about the sum total of over 500cc machines. Historic racing these days looks nothing like racing was back then! In the early sixties there were a few big triumphs - the Jesser triumph had a nine stud head and was 730cc (the maximum you can get to with the parts available then). To get a genuine 750 Triumph you have to use ten stud heads - 1970s stuff, I believe. There were never any 750 Triumphs or Nortons raced pre 62, as far as I know.
In the old days, it was certainly better to ride a 350. You could get about four rides per meeting.
In the old days very few guys cheated on capacity.
I don't know about the cost of tyres, I ran my T1 compound triangulars for about 5 years, then they were second hand when I got them. The cheap road tyres these days are much better than we ever had as racing tyres, but I think you still have to pay over $130 for them, if they're any good.
Incidently - about log books - they are used in car racing, for cars which have authenticated racing histories - how many bikes racing these days were actually around back then? In a few later classes CAMS allows drivers to make replicas - Class N,C, and A touring cars,in particular, post 77 I believe.
The car guys have eligibility problems, but they've controlled the situation fairly well - can't say the same about bikes! |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
